The Case of Su Haiping vs. The United States

I have frequently written about Chinese Americans victimized due to racial profiling by American law enforcement agencies. Dr. Su Haiping was one such victim. As reported by the San Jose Mercury News, his case has finally come to trial after nearly 6 years. Some of the proceedings in court has been reported by the World Journal, the national daily in Chinese, and I have provided a translation below.

Court Case on (violation of) Privacy Rights Opens, Su Haiping Asking $5.2 Million Compensation.

Lawyers for UCSC agriculture scientist Su Haiping on December 6 accuse US government of invasion of his rights to privacy, pointing out that after FBI concluded that Su represent security risk, the management of NASA Ames reveal the findings to Su’s co-workers and at the same time took away Su’s access to Ames Research Center. (Thus) causing heavy damage to Su’s professional reputation and his psychological wellbeing. Representative for the plaintiff is asking compensation of $5.2 miillion from the federal government.

Su’s invasion of privacy case occurred in 2008, at the time when he was working as one of expert analysts for UCSC’s University Affiliated Research Center. The principal source of funding was from NASA. At the time, Su had already been working at the Ames Research Center for nearly 3 years.

Government attorney countered that the difficulty of determining the invasion of a person’s privacy is very high, because such cases involves under what circumstances, to whom and what was said. According to court documents, defendant denied invasion of Su’s rights to privacy. Furthermore, the government attorney believes that disclosures by FBI and NASA were not very harmful to Su, because even though he can no longer go to Ames to work, he remained employed by UCSC.

Su’s case began in July of 2007 when he filled personal information on e-QIP for the purpose of getting NASA approval for facility entry in 2008. After submitting to NSA, he received the entry pass in January 2008 uneventfully. According to Su’s attorney, e-QIP was a new tool used by the government to check on staff after 9-11.

Michael Reedy, Su’s attorney, pointed out that NASA never obtained Su’s permission before turning over the completed e-QIP form to FBI. Defense objected and Davila, the presiding judge, ruled that the hearing does not include the e-QIP matter.

Beginning February 2008, FBI agent Sherman Kwok along with NASA personnel interviewed Su twice, both times in a windowless room at the (Ames) research center.

On March 21, 2008, Su went to Oakland to undertake a FBI administered lie detector test. Su was distraught after the test. According to court documents, FBI agent Kwok told Su that the lie detector results were not good, but there were no means to do a retest. The results were sent on to NASA.

According to Su’s testimony on December 5, June 24 2008 was a unforgettable day in his memory. On that day, Robert Dolci, head of NASA Ames security gave Su a letter signed by Dolci. The letter stated that according to results of investigations, the center considers Su a security risk to NASA’s intellectual property and thus is revoking his access to Ames research center (and the right to work there).

First Chinese American Leaders

Thanks to historian and veteran China hand, Scott D. Seligman, we now know something of Chinese American leaders that lived in America as early as the middle of 19th century and the turn of the 19th to the 20th century.

The first notable leader who fought for the civil rights of Chinese in America was Wong Chin Foo. Wong came to the U.S. in 1867 at the age of 20 under the sponsorship of a well meaning American missionary who thought that after being properly educated, Wong would return to China to preach to the vast masses waiting to be converted.

Wong lasted one year at the university at Lewisburg, Pa, predecessor to today's Bucknell University. He didn't finish his studies but went back to China to marry and sired a son. He came back to the U.S. in 1873 alone leaving his family behind and became a U.S. citizen in 1874. For the next quarter of a century he lived in the U.S. and he was to exercise his rights of American citizenship to the max.

In a role reversal, he self appointed himself as China's first missionary to America to extoll values in Buddhism and Confucianism and to counter anti-Chinese prejudices and racial bias at every opportunity. He wrote and spoke tirelessly and was credited with the first to coin the term, Chinese American. He challenged anti-Chinese demagogue, Denis Kearney, to a public debate and he was judged the winner when they finally did meet in a public confrontation.

He said on behalf of the Chinese living in America, "As residents of the United States, we claim a common manhood with all other nationalities, and believe we should have that manhood recognized according to the principles of common humanity and American freedom." Not bad for someone whose English was a second language without the advantage of proper schooling.

The next set of Chinese American leaders as told by Seligman was a group of four that organized a fundraiser for the benefit of victims of pogrom in Kishinev, then a part of Russian empire. The benefit was a play held in the Chinese Theater in Chinatown in May of 1903. There were three performances in order to satisfy the demand. New York Times reported that this must be the first event of this kind ever in the world.

The leaders, all ethnic Chinese, were Joseph Singleton, Guy Maine, Dek Foon and Jue Chue. All four were prominent in the Chinese community, spoke fluent English and well known to the New York society at large. Two of them saw the advantage of adopting Anglicized names and three had Caucasian wives. They were pillars of society and saw their future staked to the American soil.

They have been battling against the Chinese Exclusion Acts and the bias against the Chinese ability to immigrate the America. They have been reaching out to the American society at large and in holding the fundraiser, they were aligning with the Jewish community and indirectly protesting the injustices being suffered by the Chinese in America.

These stories go to show that contrary to the image of docile, well behaved Chinese in America, we always had activists willing to challenge injustices and intolerable status quo.  These individuals deserved to be honored and remembered.
=================================
I had known Scott as a highly regarded China business consultant, the July 2013 issue of Chinese American Forum reintroduced him to me as a historian wherein he wrote about Chinese fundraiser for the Jews of Kishinev.

For Chinese Scientists, America is the Land of Opportunity to Go to Jail.

A similar version has been posted on China-US Focus.
-------------------------------------------------------

The recently concluded (non)case of the government vs. Dr. Bo Jiang bore a striking resemblance to the scandalous Wen Ho Lee affair that occurred in 1999 and strongly suggests that racial profiling and bigotry is still alive and well, at least in Virginia.

On March 16, Dr. Bo Jiang, a citizen of China boarded a plane at Dulles International bound for Beijing. He was accosted and escorted off the plane by FBI agents, put in jail and charged with lying to the law enforcement officials and possible violations of Arms Export Control Act.

About 7 weeks later, on May 3, the prosecution dropped all charges against Dr. Jiang. But before he was allowed to leave the US for Chengdu China he had to plead to a misdemeanor charge of “misuse of government equipment” in exchange for time already served in jail. The plea was so the government did not have to admit that they made a mistake.

In 1999, Dr. Lee, the then Los Alamos scientist, was accused of being a spy for China by the New York Times, fingered by then Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, thrown into solitary confinement for ten months. Lee was then released with an apology from the presiding judge for prosecutorial misconduct.

In the most recent case, Congressman Frank Wolf (R-VA) was instrumental in the arrest of Jiang and he was quite proud of his role as the self-appointed spy catcher.  After Jiang’s arrest, the Congressman held a press conference on March 18 and issued a press release in praise of his own role in this affair. 

Wolf is a well-known, long time critic of Peoples’ Republic of China. On March 7, he held a press conference expressing alarm at security violations at NASA-Langley. According to him, anonymous whistleblowers had told him of a Chinese national with unauthorized access to NASA’s secrets.

Wolf on March 7 already knew about Jiang but was setting the stage for the drama to come. He did say, “It is my understanding that this Chinese national is affiliated with an institution in China that has been designated as an ‘entity of concern’ by other U.S. government agencies.”

At the March 18 conference, Wolf revealed that Jiang was “trying the leave the country on a one-way ticket.” At the airport, the federal agents had asked what electronic media he had with him. Jiang admitted that he had a cellphone, a memory stick, an external hard drive and a new computer. A search of his luggage found other media items not mentioned by Jiang and that discrepancy too became grounds for suspicion.

At this point, Jiang could have explained that his work visa in the US was expiring and his contract was not being renewed. He bought a one-way ticket back to China because he wasn’t planning to come back. There was nothing sudden about his flight to Beijing.

He could have pointed out that the work he did as a NASA contractor was unrelated to national security and he had no access to data and technology related to national security.

But no one was interested in what the suspect had to say. Fortunately for Jiang, he then got a break. The court appointed Fernando Groene as his defense counsel.  An experienced former federal prosecutor, Gorene accepted the appointment because he was outraged by the injustice of Jiang’s case.

“It’s all about a witch hunt,” he said to the media shortly after taking the case. The mills of justice ground on for a few more weeks before the prosecution confirmed that Jiang had been telling the truth, namely his computers contained no data or files that violated national security regulations.

Groene was quick to praise the prosecution for being fair minded after seeing that they had no case. Of course, this did not mean that Jiang received an apology from Wolf, FBI or anyone representing the federal government.

He experienced first hand the adage, “you can’t fight city hall.” Jiang had to accept a guilty plea to a misdemeanor charge for the time served—a misdemeanor of misusing government equipment that most federal employees would also have been found guilty of.

There were, of course, no offers of compensation for his 7 weeks of incarceration or damages to his reputation, dignity and personal privacy.

After the case was over and Jiang had gone back to China, attorney Groene gave additional color surrounding this case.

NASA could hardly ignore the agitation from the Congressman with the power of funding oversight.  In response, NASA had earlier conducted an internal investigation of the allegations against Jiang and found no substantiation. This was duly reported back to Wolf but he would hear none of it.

A dissatisfied Wolf then wrote letters on March 13 to the US Attorney’s office and FBI insisting that they investigate further, leading to the ensuing fiasco

Jiang’s implied sinister connection with an “entity of concern” alluded by Wolf was apparently the school in Chengdu Jiang attended for undergraduate training. Groene pointed out that the Chengdu school had a sister college relationship with the College of William & Mary and the president of William & Mary is none other than Robert Gates, former Secretary of Defense in Bush and Obama administrations.

If anyone has violated federal regulations, Groene concluded, it was Congressman Wolf for disclosing confidential personal information on his website.

Groene is a naturalized American citizen from Cuba. He is proud to be an American and grateful to be in the land of opportunities but he is concerned over the erosion of our civil liberties as exemplified by the arbitrary law enforcement action against Jiang.

There are other conclusions to be drawn from this latest case of racial profiling against ethnic Chinese.

Obviously the US does not have enough scientists that can meet the requirements for security clearances and are thus qualified to do work involving national security. To get around this problem, Government agencies such as NASA have been parceling out work that are unrelated to national security to contractors who can hire scientists that do not hold security clearances. This was the case with Jiang, a Chinese citizen without permanent resident status.

Such a separation obviously does not satisfy Congressman Wolf and his ilk and thus Bo Jiang becomes a cautionary tale for any ethnic Chinese scientists working in the US.

Whether it’s in Silicon Valley, universities, government laboratories or major corporations, if you are ethnic Chinese, not only your conduct has to be absolutely law abiding, you also have to stay as far away as possible from being tainted by any hint of wrongdoing. Others might routinely “misuse” government equipment but not you if you’re Chinese.

During the Wen Ho Lee era, John Deutsch was the then head of CIA. He was reprimanded for routinely downloading confidential files to his laptop and regularly taking it home--a clear case of violating government regulations and gross misuse of government equipment. But he was not ethnic Chinese and therefore he did not have to cop a plea nor spend a day in jail.

Contrary to popular myth, justice in America is not blind but is on the side of the government. Even if you are innocent, once arrested you are in trouble. As Wen Ho Lee demonstrated then and Jiang now, downloading while Chinese can be dangerous to your wellbeing.

There is a more to Huawei’s trouble with Congress than meets the eye.

Huawei’s debacle with US Congress raises troubling questions at many levels. Huawei will be paying a heavy price for a colossal failure to communicate across the two cultures, but this story is more than about just one company.

Huawei initiated the dialogue by inviting a Congressional investigation of its company operations. The House Select Committee on Intelligence responded but did not give Huawei officials the desired endorsement. Instead, the House Committee specifically recommends that the US government and private sector entities do no business with Huawei on the ground that their equipment constitutes a national security risk--a devastating hit on Huawei’s reputation that could hurt Huawei’s business around the world.

Based on the company’s past engagements in the US market, Huawei should have anticipated a hostile reception. Its past attempts to make a minority investment in a floundering 3Com and an acquisition of a relative start-up were stymied by the US government as a perceived threat to the US national security.

The company is said to have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on consultants and Washington lobbyists to help Huawei deal with the Congressional committee. Apparently these advisors did not appreciate the rather formidable built-in bias Huawei needed to overcome. Drawing from their investigative report, it is clear that the Committee began on the presumption that Huawei represents a real threat to national security. Nothing in the eleven-month investigation changed their minds.

Just the mere possibility that cyber espionage can take place via Huawei equipment was enough to brand Huawei a risk to national security. To overcome the bias, Huawei would have had to prove that Huawei equipment could never host cyber attack against the US, obviously not a stand Huawei could take credibly.

By way of mitigating the Committee’s concern, Huawei offered to have all their equipment thoroughly tested and certified by an independent laboratory before the equipment could be introduced into the US market similar to the arrangement accepted by the government of Great Britain. The Congressional Committee rejected Huawei’s proposal for the following reasons: (1) The US market is too large for any testing to be sufficiently comprehensive. (2) The testing only applies to the configuration being tested but the configuration could be altered subsequently during installation or later upgrades. (3) Such a certification can even encourage a false sense of security and reduced vigilance. In other words, there was no way for Huawei.

The Committee asked Huawei to provide information on their contracts, pricing practice for their products and services and scope of their operations and, recognizing the sensitive nature of the information being sought, offered to receive such information under a confidentiality agreement. Apparently, Huawei did not have the confidence that Congress could keep information confidential and refused to comply. Thus the Committee concluded that Huawei might be selling “at least some of its products in the United States below the costs of production,”--a huge leap indeed based on information the Committee did not get.

The Huawei officials also failed to established empathy with the House Committee—to put it mildly.  Given a Congressional body with no understanding of China or at least none that they would admit to, empathy may have been too much to aspire. The Committee could not even make a distinction between state owned enterprises (SOEs) and privately owned ones. Somehow in their minds, a large successful private enterprise must be connected to the Chinese government, and a sinister connection at that.

They insisted on wanting to know about how Ren Zhengfei, Huawei’s founder, was able to leave his SOE employer to start his own company, as if that was unheard of, while actually in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s, people in China were leaving SOEs in droves. How was Ren invited to attend the 12^th National Congress, the Committee asked? Huawei’s answer should have been: Jiang Zemin began to recognize the important role of entrepreneurs in China’s economy and selectively honored them by inviting some to the national confab.

The House Committee’s conclusion on Huawei, as its report readily admitted, was based on hypotheticals and not on specific illegal acts committed by the company. The hypotheticals are easy to conjure. However, the only known successful cyber attack the world knows for certain is the deployment of American made Stuxnet worm on the Iranian centrifuges. Certainly Americans have the bona fides to imagine how cyber attacks can be done.

The Internet is populated with screaming accusations from network security consultants—undoubtedly looking for work—pointing to China as the source of rampant cyber attacks, thus providing cover for Congressional paranoia. The Committee does claim to have smoking guns describing Huawei wrongdoings but these are classified and not available to the public.  

In a way, this is reminiscent of the Cox Committee’s investigation in the late 1990’s on the alleged espionage activities of Chinese in America. The unclassified part of the Cox Committee report painted a lurid picture of Chinese espionage running amuck in America. Tens of thousand storefronts in America registered to Chinese entities were cells and every ethnic Chinese was a potential spy for China. The Cox Committee also assured the public that they had smoking guns though consigned to the classified section of the report and not available to the public.

By now the smoke from the Cox Report has largely dissipated and the only concrete result was the arrest of Los Alamos scientist, Dr. Wen Ho Lee. He spent nine months in solitary confinement before the presiding judge apologized to Lee and threw out the case. The legacy of the hysteria created by the Cox Committee investigation is a lingering suspicion of the loyalty of Chinese Americans and the erosion of the idea that US Congress behaves honorably.

Sadly, politicians have continued to find profit in taking pot shots at China. The incumbent President Obama, a Nobel Peace laureate no less, proclaimed a military pivot to Asia, and thus encouraging conflict in the waters around China, to show that he is not soft on China. His opponent, Romney, promises to declare a trade war against China on the day he takes office—if elected. Members of Congress regularly take the floor to blame China for all the economic woes in America. None of the American leaders of any stature have spoken about the importance of getting along with China.

Bashing China has no apparent down side for American politicians unless and until the bilateral relations between the two most powerful nations spiral out of control leading to tragic consequences. The challenge for the incoming leaders of Beijing is to strike a balance between being more transparent to ameliorate American feelings and reassuring its own constituents that China’s sovereignty is not being compromised by American demands. It will be up to the American people to punish mindless China bashing by voting the offenders out of the office and encourage leaders that recognize the importance of promoting mutual trust between the two nations.

What’s at stake is the future peace and prosperity of the world depending on China and the US getting along without rancor.

_______________________________

A shorter version appeared in China-US Focus.

The U.S. Must Avoid the Trap on East China Sea

Recently a strange “issue advocacy ad” appeared in the Wall Street Journal paid for by the Tokyo Metropolitan government. The gist of the ad is to tell the American people that the Tokyo government intends to purchase certain islands in East China Sea and is seeking American “understanding and support.”

The islands in question are ostensibly to be purchased from some private Japanese owner so one would wonder why American support is worthy of such attention-grabbing ploy. It turns out that there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye and the person orchestrating this scheme is none other than Shintaro Ishihara, the governor of Tokyo.

Ishihara is a rabid right-wing nationalist previously known for giving America the middle finger salute in the ‘80s when he wrote the book, The Japan that Can Say No. He is despised by China and other Asian nations for prominently denying that the Nanjing Massacre and other WWII atrocities were ever committed by the Japanese imperial troops.

The string of islands Ishihara wants to buy are located north of Taiwan, referred to as Senkaku by the people in Japan and as Diaoyu by the people in China, Taiwan and the Chinese diaspora over the world. These islands are geologically connected to Taiwan and separate from the geological formation that makes up the Ryukyu (or Okinawan) island chain.

Japan claimed possession of the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands since 1894 when the islands were made part of the Okinawa prefecture. But China had, since the 14^thcentury, administered the islands as a part of Taiwan. These islands were ceded to Japan along with Taiwan in 1895 when the Qing forces lost the war with Japan.

At the end of WWII, according to the agreement struck by the leaders of the victorious Allies, Taiwan was returned to China and these islands should have been included. But for strategic reasons, the U.S. held onto these islands until 1972, at which time, the US handed these islands to Japan along with the Okinawan chain of islands.

There was no historical or geological justification for the regrettable American action. Instead, the action has directly led to the festering dispute between China and Taiwan on the one side and Japan on the other. Ishihara exploited this bone of contention to embarrass his own national government and raise the tension between China and Japan. The ad in the Wall Street Journal was his attempt to enlarge the dispute and bring the US into the boil.

Indeed, Ishihara has raised the temperature of the confrontation between the foreign affair ministries of China and Japan. Japan has had to recall its ambassador to Beijing and change to one less sympathetic to China. Cities in China raged with citizen protests, in some cases overturning Japanese branded police cars and smashing Japanese storefronts. Among the greater China, messages condemning Japan filled the Internet.

A group of activists from Hong Kong recently braved stormy seas to land at one of the islands to plant a flag of China. Their subsequent arrest by the Japanese coast guard was followed by immediate demand for release by the Beijing and Hong Kong governments. Prompt release without formal charges by Japan was then met with vocal disapproval from the Ishihara followers.

The American public needs to know that the Chinese reaction on these islands, whether from China, Taiwan or the diaspora around the world, is deeply rooted from a half century of humiliation suffered at the hands of Japanese imperialism. Since Japan has never formally apologized for the many atrocities committed by their imperial troops, the Chinese people cannot forget.

The squabble may seem trivial to the American policymakers but it is a tremendously emotional one for the Chinese people. Time and again it has been shown that it does not take much for the Chinese to react viscerally to any provocation instigated by Japan. There have been incidents of high seas chicken between fishing boats from China and Taiwan versus the coast guard cutters from Japan, each accusing the other for initiating the hostile bump and run. The incendiary nature of these incidents can quickly get out of hand, escalate into shooting conflicts and rage out of the control of either government.

The US State Department is aware of the sensitivity surrounding the islands but is playing the role of strategic ambiguity badly. The islands should never have been handed to Japan administratively. To this date, State Department spokesperson has to awkwardly demur when asked if the US security pact with Japan includes these uninhabited islands and avoid publicly stating as to which country is the rightful owner.

To make sure that the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands do not become a flash point for escalation into large scale armed conflict, the U.S. must inform Japan in no uncertain terms that America will never go to war over disputes of these islands. By unequivocally taking the US out of the ring, provocateurs like Ishihara will not find the dry flint needed to set the ownership issue aflame. This is an important first step to cooling down the emotions and allows diplomacy between China and Japan to find resolution.

An updated version was posted in New America Media.

Linsanity too late for Soldiers Chen and Lew

An edited version appeared on February 26, 2012 in the New America Media.

On a recent Sunday morning, I was glued to the boob tube watching a professional basketball game from the opening jump ball to the last waning second. Haven’t done this for years but suddenly I too have been swept up by the global phenomenon of linsanity.


By now, everybody knows linsanity refers to Jeremy Lin, the basketball star from Harvard, undrafted by any of the NBA teams, who warmed the bench for two other professional teams before coming off the bench for the NY Knicks in an act of desperation by the coach. Lin promptly led his team to a win, the first of nine wins in the next eleven games. He became the toast of New York and an instant worldwide sensation.


The Knicks took on Dallas Mavericks, last year’s NBA champ and I saw a real deal. Lin drove through a forest of opponents for layups or passed to wide-open teammates. He sank long-range three pointers in crucial moments or he drew the defenders so that his teammates were unimpeded as they threw in three point bombs. He was fearless and physical as the game dictated.


In the post game analysis, the great Magic Johnson unequivocally declared that Lin’s star presence would be in the NBA for a long time. None of his fellow panelists disagreed.


Lin’s heroics on the court immediately drew a following from the Asian communities of the world, heretofore thought too small, too short and too frail to play this contact sport. But Lin didn’t just become a role model for Asian Americans. He has won the ultimate accolade: every kid--black, brown or white--on the neighborhood playground now aspires to be a Jeremy Lin.


Linsanity also caused me to reflect on the tragic fate of Danny Chen and Harry Lew, two American soldiers who took their own lives in Afghanistan. These were two unrelated victims of hazing by their fellow soldiers. Sadly the misery they experienced was so brutal and unrelenting that they found ending their young lives the only way out of their torment.


These incidents reflect a failure of American values and the leadership of the military: The former because America continues to regard people of Asian ancestry as not American, but as the other; the latter because the military not only failed to prevent such racism from their ranks but also failed to impose appropriate penalty on the perpetrators for the hate crimes.


Hate crimes against African Americans evoke high decibel outcries but hardly a murmur when perpetrated against Asian Americans.


It will be up to the Asian American community to make noise in order to rectify the wrong. During the first Gulf War, friendly missiles shot down two American helicopters. The pilots who pulled the trigger were exonerated but not Captain Jim Wang of the Awac flying surveillance.


The late Sam Chu Lin, a mainstream media star who became a voice of conscience, rallied the Chinese American community and with the help of the Committee of 100 made sure that Captain Wang had proper defense counsel leading to dismissal of all charges against him.


Wen Ho Lee was the designated scapegoat and sacrificial lamb in the political struggle between the Republican Congress and Democrat President Clinton. He would have rotted in jail as a spy for China had the Asian American community not come to his support. Sam played an active role in this case as well.


In this case, the American public took no pains to make the distinction as to whether Lee, who came from Taiwan, was Chinese or not. To this day, some still considers him a spy though the court found him not guilty of any espionage charges. Those that still accuse Lee of spying have also forgotten that the court did find the FBI lying in court under oath.


Maybe Jeremy Lin with his continued success will erase some of the prejudices that reside in America against Asians. Perhaps linsanity, had it occurred a couple years earlier, could have blunted some of the bias of the American soldiers and caused them to regard ethnic Asian in their ranks as less gook and more fellow soldiers.


But we can’t count on Jeremy Lin to carry entire load for racial equality on his shoulders. We, the Asian American community, must stand up and demand our rights as full fledged, tax paying, law abiding citizens to all the respect pertaining thereto just like the next person.

Keeping Manufacturing in America Won't be Easy

In his State of the Union, President Obama stressed the importance of keeping manufacturing in America. The reasoning is that in order to continue to innovate and develop the next generation must-have products, the US needs manufacturing that uses leading edge technology. Nothing wrong with the reasoning, but it may be too late.

A lengthy analysis on why jobs are flowing to China based on the Apple iPhone experience appeared in the New York Times. One of the most important findings of the NYT piece was that America simply no longer has the skill sets to meet Apple’s demands for a high quality, technology product. America has lost the edge to make things.

Advanced manufacturing depends on staffing the factory floor from the production line to the line supervisors with people possessing technical skills. The training programs Obama talked about might serve as temporary Band-Aids that might keep certain production from leaving in the short term. But to maintain a world leadership position, the US will need far more technicians, engineers and scientists than the country is producing.

For many years long before the 2008 financial meltdown, the smartest and brightest of American graduates were pursuing careers on Wall Street rather than careers in science and engineering. Making financial products was easier and more lucrative than manufacturing hard goods. Value was created more rapidly and more profitably by financial manipulation than by selling hard goods.

During the height of Japan bashing in the 1980’s, the late legendary Akio Morita, CEO of Sony, said America was good at moving money from one pocket to the other but not in making anything.

For decades the majority of Americans, most of the so-called 99%, have been getting a basic education inferior to what their parents received. Although politicians readily acknowledge the importance of public education, budget allocations did not follow lip service. Classroom size got bigger and kids were taught fewer hours in a day and fewer school days in a year.

To meet the required budget cuts, schools are forced to cut out arts, music and other non-core courses and after school activities. Bare bones programs leave students uninspired as they sleep walked to graduation not much wiser than when they started. Teachers waved the students through rather than making sure that the lessons took hold.

Of course, there are pockets of exception. Perhaps 5% of the Americans can afford to subsidize their local school budget out of their pockets and help raise the quality of education for their children or send their kids to better quality private schools. But that leaves a lot of untrained minds that will not realize their full potential.

In some parts of America, pro science is regarded as anti-religion, or worse yet pro religion is ipso facto considered as antithetical to science. The local sentiment that religious concepts should be taught on same footing as science, such as creationism vs. evolutionism, would leave young minds poorly prepared for a productive adult life in a technology driven world.

Out of the forty 2012 finalists of Intel Science Talent Search, 14 have been identified as ethnic Chinese, 7 with South Asian surnames and 5 others with some other Asian surnames. For many years now, more than half of the finalists, high school students with outstanding aptitude in sciences, are first generation immigrants or sons and daughters of immigrants from Asia.

Immigrants from China, India and Russia, in particular, come from cultures with deep respect for learning and science. They have not been in America long enough for the anti-science mentality to rub off.

So long as we are not able to turn out enough science and engineering graduates of our own, then President Obama is correct when he said we need to welcome foreign students to stay after they graduate and not push them away.

But even if immigrants lead in the development of innovations, as we see in Silicon Valley, America still needs a solid pyramid base of people with skills that would turn innovations into commercial successes. President Obama spoke of keeping and building leading edge manufacturing in the US. This is not going to happen unless there is a fundamental shift in the American attitude about the importance of math and science.
__________________
An edited version appeared in New America Media and Nation of Change.